Stephen Garrett said he is ready to camp out next to the Roundhouse until Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham is impeached.

His grievance is the state’s so-called red-flag legislation, which Lujan Grisham signed into law in February.

It gives judges the power to impose an emergency 10-day order requiring people posing a threat to themselves or others to relinquish their firearms. A one-year order could then be imposed later.

Garrett argues the law is unconstitutional, and to make his point Sunday, he started hanging tarps off the side of a tent canopy to cover his cot next to the Capitol.

“I’m going to stay here. Whatever that takes,” said Garrett, who owns an art studio in Moriarty. “This is about your rights, folks. I can’t stress that more.”

About 30 others from across the state joined him Sunday to demonstrate against the gun legislation as well as other social and political grievances. Garrett said there would be another gathering Monday.

“I’m here because of work. I’m a poor construction worker. I don’t care what you say about the virus, you can’t tell people they can’t work,” said Santa Fe native Keith Yohai. “If you want to back that up by saying, ‘You bankers and you property owners, you can’t charge rent,’ that’s fine. But they’re not doing that.”

Show what you're thinking about this story

You must be logged in to react.
Click any reaction to login.

Recommended for you

(21) comments

Marilyn Webb

This is NOT why he's protesting! Why are you lying?

Keith Yohai

Khal, find me, I'm on, we're organizing and having fun too.

Keith Yohai

Find me on MINDS.COM Truthforge, @truthship

You may not agree with everything I post, I don't even agree with everything I put up on my wall, but discussion is better than fisticuffs.

Keith Yohai

You admit to your willingness to allow the left to be violent

"As I said nonviolence worked for a short time but since then it has been back to the same old behaviors of promises and platitudes used primarily to ignore the problems at hand."

While denying that you, and all who oppose the right at this point, are trying to take guns from any who disagree with marx.

Keith Yohai

I'm having trouble getting my comment posted on this thread. Let's try again.

"and offer no reasoning except the paranoid delusion that they want your guns. Horse Hockey. " To believe that gun control at this point is not happening, is not the goal of the marxists on the left (they will keep their guns) or that it is not an act of preparation for the persecution, imprisonment and outright destruction of anyone who is not a marxist, is so ludicrous that I had to create an account here and push back. I happen to know marxists who work at this paper and I know that my comments, if I make too much sense will end up getting me on a list and in trouble. I have been censored on NEXT DOOR continurally and MEETUP.COM as well. If you did not hear what Beto said, if you did not look into the facts, the actual laws, that were pushed in Virginia, then I can only guess that you are benefiting from the gun grabbers. After all, the people who come to take our guns, do so with guns of their own that they will not give back. My Father is a Jewish immigrant from Cuba. He was born there before Castro and my Grandmother smuggles her 8 brothers and sisters out. My father is not a good man, I'll say that up front, but my family knows what it's like to run from communist oppression and anyone who says that this is not happening, growing, in America, is woefully ignorant of what marxism is, why they want your guns, and what the purpose of taking your right to defend yourself away is.

Khal Spencer

"...I don’t care what you say about the virus, you can’t tell people they can’t work,” said Santa Fe native Keith Yohai. “If you want to back that up by saying, ‘You bankers and you property owners, you can’t charge rent,’ that’s fine. But they’re not doing that."

Now that is a good point! According to an article in the SF Reporter, "...Both the New Mexico Supreme Court and the city have issued orders that suspend evictions during the crisis, though neither frees tenants from the obligation to pay their rent owed in the long run...The orders also do not offer any relief for people who own their own homes and are suddenly questioning their ability to make mortgage payments, or landlords who might be put in a bind if tenants can't pay..."

So where are all the Marxists in the Democratic People's Republic of Santa Fe? From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs? Maybe some of the rich folks living in our gated communities should pony up the rent or mortgage for the working class folks who are laid off and S-O-L right now. How about a special emergency tax levy?

Nah....just cardboard cutout liberals here.

Khal Spencer

CNBC eviction numbers.

Keith Yohai

That is exactly what I commented on at the roundhouse.

However, to be honest, I would rather we just work than they tell property owners what they can and cannot do. After all, they are trying to come take your property, while those that paid for your politicians to be placed in office, those who make money from the increased revenue that the big box essential businesses are making, the 1% of 1%, the bankers, the puppet masters, the globalists, the NWO if you will, they don't care if people below them loose their right to charge rent. marxism doesn't want anyone except the string pullers to own property at all. They believe in a utopia of magical people who run the machines that decide who lives and who dies through technocratic socialism. That is a lie so stupid that it can only be perpetrated with more lies. Lies built on top of lies and it's all coming tumbling down now.

Khal Spencer

1. At last count, over a dozen states have enacted red flag laws. So far, no Federal or state court that I know of has ruled they are unconstitutional. So I agree with Miranda Viscoli that this can't be said to be unconstitutional, although everyone has a right to an opinion. Its the folks in the black robes whose opinions count.

2. If you want to change the law, elect sympathetic legislators.

3. My beef with this law was based on procedure and politics. One, procedural grounds. It briefly in an intermediate version included a right to counsel but that was quickly stripped out. Two, it uses the lowest standard of evidence, preponderance. Florida, if I remember correctly, uses a "beyond preponderance" or similar language so the complainant has to go beyond fifty percent plus a feather.

As far as the politics, I spoke to Rep. Ely last year and raised these issues. The representative recognized my concerns with right to counsel but said as far as he was concerned, the courts could work that out as he didn't want to create a "full employment for lawyers act". My own legislators sent me curt "thanks for your input" emails.

So going back to my second point, if folks want more due process built in, they either have to get a court to agree or have to elect some legislators who will try to amend the law. I think a red flag law is a good idea as long as it is not written in such a way that someone being served is at the mercy of the court rather than being able to fairly contest the order. I think this bill is shaky in that regard.

Interestingly, the Journal had an editorial last week about the kid from Rio Rancho who opened fire in his school and then had a judge let him off the hook with no restrictions. I emailed the Journal Editorial Board asking why the new red flag law was not used as certainly this kid can't be trusted with a firearm (or apparently those responsible for him). But that wasn't done to my knowledge and furthermore, it never occured to the Ed Board to even bring it up, as they told me in an email response.

No law is much good if you don't use it properly. Give a hammer and saw to a monkey and he can't build a house. What happened in that courtroom is astonishing.

George Chandler

Good place for the guy, walled off where he can't do any harm. For 7 more years, while he waits for MLG to disappear! Hope he has a baby-sitter for his business.

Barry Rabkin

George, I just realized that your time-period reflecting these peoples' wait until Grisham is gone is correct. I would bet many "dollars to donuts" that she will be re-elected and very easily re-elected. Personally, I am looking forward to the 2022 election to vote for her to be our Governor again.

Miranda Viscoli

I think there were more guns and portable toilets than people at this protest. ERPO laws don't infringe on 2nd amendment rights and are a game changer when it games to preventing suicides.

David Ford

Waaaaa. I'm going to stay here until I get my way. Dress warm folks. Sounds rather childish and familiar - to the highest levels of the land. The completely false narrative of "wanting to take your guns away" is the standard whine from these groups spurred on by the morally and financially bankrupt NRA (thoughts and prayers). Nobody wants your guns but a MAJORITY of Americans do question the need to have an arsenal capable of taking out an entire city block in a few seconds as something the founders were concerned about. The operational word here is - PARANOIA to the extreme and to the point of rendering these "activists" non-functional citizens. Your standard talking points are like peeing into the wind because they make no sense in the grander scheme of things and offer no reasoning except the paranoid delusion that they want your guns. Horse Hockey. I am not interested in the slippery slope argument either unless we are talking about civil rights. And on that note it is interesting that conservatives (even in congress) have expressed serious concerns when seeing a black male with a gun, expressing those same rights as a white male....

Judith Senda

“Sounds rather childish and familiar...”

Yeah, it does sound familiar, kinda like CHOP/CHAZ. Except no one’s stealing, looting, spraying graffiti, smashing windows, or burning buildings.

David Ford

Well unlike these that you obviously support, the Civil Rights movement has heard nothing but empty promises and platitudes for decades and more. Sometimes if change is actually needed - unlike the need to arm oneself like the 82nd Airborne - then you must get everyone's attention. The Civil Rights movement was born that way and included the outright murder of American citizens who protested for that right and yet the movement is still fighting for basic rights that you and others take for granted, including the right to not be murdered by the police. The history of protests in this country is the same for all issues and races as far as getting the message through - look them up including the violent union protests of the 1920's (mostly white people) of which we are all beneficiaries for what they gained, 40 hour work week, Overtime, Health plans, paid vacation etc etc etc..... When was the last time you had to worry about driving while white, walking or running while white. How about shopping while white? Thought so.....

Michael Grimler

So, our society *deserves* the CHOP/CHAZ crowd because of the past.

Our society *deserves* all of the looting, rioting, and random murder.

Two wrongs *do* make a right.


David Ford

As usual another "reader" who completely missed the point - by a mile

good bye

Khal Spencer

So, David. Are you saying that rioting, looting, and burning is a good thing? I seem to recall that Gandhi liberated India from the Brits using nonviolent approaches and that much good was done in the sixties using similar tactics borrowed from Gandhi. The sight of Brits beating peaceful protestors was seen round the world much as the violent police acts on the Edmund Pettus Bridge caused change here.

So if you want violence, you will get violence in return. Beware of what you wish for.

As far as the labor movement, I don't think it was the shootings of the earliest part of the century that solidified labor rights. It was the New Deal, such as the Wagner Act.

David Ford


Sometimes your logic is quite linear and logical, other times not so much. The Wagner Act was a result of the decades long labor strife before it and was the impetus behind the actual act itself, although the Republicans vehemently opposed it in 1935 (surprise, surprise!!).

And although the police violence on the Edmund Pettus bridge brought some changes there is a very long way to go until the true meaning of freedom and pursuing a life of happiness is to be realized by, not only people of color, but all marginalized groups, the only roadblock to which is the conservative side of the country with full participation by alleged christianity..(you know the religion/mythology of love).

And no I find the acts of violence not productive in any way, however, trump's jackbooted stormtroopers are complicit in some of the recent violence by assaulting peaceful protesters using only their voices as weapons (Naval Academy grad, Vietnam Vet) as their 1st Amendment right guarantees. When up against those types of constitutional violations by the federal government itself then what options are left? As I said nonviolence worked for a short time but since then it has been back to the same old behaviors of promises and platitudes used primarily to ignore the problems at hand.

Khal Spencer

But the Wagner Act would not have been passed had FDR not been able to get his New Deal legislation passed, which of course meant he had the support of a majority in Congress. My point is that without the political empowerment, we would not have gotten anything other than more violence.

Of course the misery of previous decades had a lot to do with it, but so did the Great Depression, which led to the New Deal and the swing to FDR rather than more Herbert Hoover.

Aimee Awonohopay

Your statements are on point and (re)shed light on the core issues that so many fail to acknowledge. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Welcome to the discussion.

Thank you for joining the conversation on Please familiarize yourself with the community guidelines. Avoid personal attacks: Lively, vigorous conversation is welcomed and encouraged, insults, name-calling and other personal attacks are not. No commercial peddling: Promotions of commercial goods and services are inappropriate to the purposes of this forum and can be removed. Respect copyrights: Post citations to sources appropriate to support your arguments, but refrain from posting entire copyrighted pieces. Be yourself: Accounts suspected of using fake identities can be removed from the forum.